SP - General Slow down battles to make them feel epic and realistic

Users who are viewing this thread

In Warband, when engaging a skilled commander they would often not charge in right away, but lead their army in such a way that rushing them was suicide. What is needed here is a way for the AI commanders to utilize terrain features to their advantage and properly use formations.
Form square for incoming cavalry, create a column to attack archers, position their own archers on high ground, hold bridges, try to draw the player into water and gullies. Basically every twenty seconds or so the AI commanders need to move their units from one strategic location to another whilst using the formations as discussed. Seeing an AI use cavalry to circle behind the player's infantry would be nice.
 
You could have the AI commander play differently during battles depending on their level/tactis/exp as well. Low level tiers just rush in crazily, while more exp soldiers and commanders take the battle more slowly pressing advantages regarding position, tactics, and environment.
I actually agree and really like the idea, it would be nice to have some time to actually set up your units before the fight breaks out, instead of the instant charge that happens in most fights.
 
I am genuinely sad I haven't recorded it, it was simply put amazing. A 500 vs 500 battle, both sides were hesitant and rather than charge all out kept to their side of the battlefields. Skirmishes broke out in numerous places, 20-30 units fighting each other while the rest of the army stood back. With the river in the map lenghtwise any movement was slow and archers reaped a heavy toll. Sturgian Brigands circled around Vlandians and hit them on the sides, arches were spread out ahead and skirmishing. The river had a large battle of infantry vs infantry but then both commanders pulled back to reorganize. I led the right flank and managed to slip crossbowmen on top of the riverbank while the fight was going on but the AI countered it with a cavalry charge, which I had to countercharge with my own cav, sacrificing them in the process to allow the crossbowmen to retreat. Just watching them pull back while being chased and harrased as I charged in between them and the pursuers to break them up felt incredible. At almost 11 minutes it was also one of the longest non siege battles I had up to date.

With said experience I'd suggest to make AI more hesitant to just charge all out. Keep back and let the battle proceed in phases rather than be decided by a single clash and charge right down the middle.
the potential is there, far more so than it was in warband. As the code matures and problems get hammered out I honestly think this can happen
 
Armor values contribute to this. Most of armor only has like 10-30 defense when weapons deal a lot of damage. This means troops die quickly.. I agree 100% that something needs to be done to make battles longer. I think armor should provide much more protection and I do agree that AI should be more slow/careful at making decisions.
I had ~500vs500 battle end in like 4 minutes, part of fun in these massive battles is just watch them unfold (because most of the time I just die in first couple of minutes haha).
 
I also feel the fights are over too fast. But that is only with the looters and bandits.. as soon as you fight against mercenaries or armies they start with tactics no? Not every army is doing that thought and still its pretty fast over. was it in warband longer?
 
Battles are fast because the unit collision is screwed.

It's beyond a joke. I can't believe more people aren't noticing.

They went from this: youtu.be/pv2qb66PbUg?t=233

To this incomprehensible clusterf*ck: youtu.be/wcwrKBGFkzY?t=171

Wtf happened?
First, LOL, Jesus God that is horrible.

Another large issue is attack speed and low armor in my opinion. Melees are a meat grinder. They end so quickly in either victory or defeat that I sometimes struggle to get a hit in before the enemy dies.
 
Can someone explain to me how the first video is different from the other??? the first video is not the same situation like the second and in both videos the armies are front on front and hacking and slashing on each other. what is the difference? I mean the only difference in the second is that the blue team comes around the other team.

edit: nvm I saw some other videos and I see your point. Yes this is really bad. the dps a front can make because of that clipping is just stupid.
 
Last edited:
Battles are fast because the unit collision is screwed.

It's beyond a joke. I can't believe more people aren't noticing.

They went from this: youtu.be/pv2qb66PbUg?t=233

To this incomprehensible clusterf*ck: youtu.be/wcwrKBGFkzY?t=171

Wtf happened?
The more I see the video the more i can't explain why they remove the unit collision...it's clear that space beetween units isn't respected and it confuses all...need to be fixed quickly even if the parameters of the battles are to be slowing down.
 
not quite sold on it. For me it is mainly a pacing issue of the main game loop. If battles take 30 minutes it takes too long for the general grind. Possibly some damage scaling or stuff like clipping should be addressed, but imo the length of battle is important for general gameplay and in the campaign getting to fight a good number of battle before supper is also a factor.

To me the speed actually felt okay, mainly because of my time constraints irl. I get to fight a good number of fights, even big ones without spending hours on it.

Maybe some damage scaling setting would suffice.
 
Yep, my average battle time is around one minute. All of the OPs points should be implemented by TW. I want fights that last around 15-30mins. And sieges even longer.
 
Im sorry if mentioned before but, enemy AI should wait in their area(with taking their own formations aganist us, live) for 30 secs for our formation adjustments or movement order.

If we pass the green area with orders, or if 30 secs end -> enemy AI should start attacking.
 
Back
Top Bottom